A reply to the report of the Senatus Academicus of the University of Edinburgh, upon Dr. Reid's Memorial to ... the patrons of the University / [D.B. Reid].

  • Reid, D. B. (David Boswell), 1805-1863
Date:
1833]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A reply to the report of the Senatus Academicus of the University of Edinburgh, upon Dr. Reid's Memorial to ... the patrons of the University / [D.B. Reid]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    19/24 (page 19)
    fully taught, of a separate Chair of Practical Chemistry having been establish¬ ed, and they think it would be wrong to prevent the Professor of Chemistry in this University from devoting his whole time, while it may be in his power, to giving Practical instructions in Chemistry.” Had the Senatus been aware of the nature of Dr Reid’s course, they must have modified the statement made above. In 1825, Dr Reid visited the principal public and private establishments for teaching Chemistry at Paris, and, if he recollects well, Vauquelin was at that time Professor of Chemistry applied to the Arts, in a separate public establishment, if not in one of the Universities. In the year 1830, Clement was Professor of Chemistry applied to the Arts. Even at St Petersburg!!, there is a public establish¬ ment of Practical Chemistry, and also at Moscow. Dr Reid is not aware how far, in all these establishments abroad, the Professor confines himself to lecturing, or engages the students practically, as in the course Dr Reid has established; but he appeals to any medical man or manufacturer, who has examined, or may be requested to examine, the nature of Dr Reid’s course, whether the student is not there presented with an opportunity of studying prac¬ tically the application of Chemistry to the Arts (including Medicine), in a more efficient manner than can be pursued by merely hearing lectures. Dr Reid, also, is not aware how far these public professorships of Chemistry, applied to the Arts, have been instituted in Universi¬ ties, or are totally independent of them. 7. The Report states it would be an act of injustice to in¬ stitute A PROFESSORSHIP OF PRACTICAL CHEMISTRY. “ Even if the foregoing considerations should not appear conclusive, as to the general question, in reference to the interests of the Professor of Chemistry, who introduced the teaching of Practical Chemistry into the University; who has supported the class as taught by Dr Reid (as the Senatus will perceive from his statement) in a manner highly liberal both towards the pupils and towards Dr Reid himself; and who has already suffered from that cause a great dimi¬ nution of his professional income, in proportion as Chemistry has been taught under his direction in a more efficient manner. The Professors cannot regard the institution of a separate Chair of Practical Chemistry, during his incumbency, otherwise than as an act of injustice, to which they trust that the Honourable Patrons of the University will not give their sanction.” It is impossible for any statement to be more completely inaccu¬ rate, than that Dr Hope supported a class which he never in any way acknowledged, when it had every difficulty to contend with, with which his name was never in any way associated, till it had been esta¬ blished by the exertions of private individuals, recommended by the